NBC settles ... huh?

[FTA Michael]

The press release says:

LITTLETON, Colo., Nov 20, 2002 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- EchoStar Communications Corporation (DISH) and National Broadcasting Company, Inc., (NBC) announced today they have settled their dispute over the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act and distant network channel transmission. That litigation, pending in Federal court in Florida, will be dismissed between EchoStar and NBC.
And that's all it really says. So what was the dispute, and how was it settled?

P.S. I feel like the stupidest human alive, but after lurking for days trying to figure out how to get to the way cool DBSTalk holiday music channel, I'm still stumped. :shrug:

[Mike123abc]

NBC along with the other networks had sued Echostar for letting people recieve Distant networks in areas that are served by local TV stations. Essentially SHVIA said that only people in white areas could recieve distant networks, Echostar was not enforcing this, and Echostar lost the case.

[scooper]

Now comes the can of worms -

What if your outside the Grade B profile, but your city/market IS served by E* or D* ? Our traditional answer has been that "you are unserved, and so qualify for both Distant Networks AND your "Locals"". Is this answer still good or is the network affiliate going to consider that E*/D* coverage makes you "served" ?

I can certainly understand the Networks and their affiliates concern about people being sold Distant networks when you ARE served by a Grade B signal.

Any wannabe lawyers want to take a crack at this ?

[mnassour]

If you're outside of Grade B, then you're in a white area. End of story.

[Richard King]

Echostar lost the case.Can you point out where any details on this indicating that Echostar lost are posted? The release doesn't state who won or lost.

[Richard King]

If you're outside of Grade B, then you're in a white area. End of story.Bingo. I just upped a customer yesterday to a Dish 500 so that they could get West Palm Beach locals off of 110. They had previously been getting NBC, CBS, and Fox from NY due to thier "white area" status. They were allowed to continue to receive the NY channels after adding WPB locals.

[Geronimo]

They settled. No winner or loser per se. No details of settlement are forthcoming.

[Mike123abc]

Dish lost the case really, but probably agreed to non monetary settlement. THey probably agreed to carry pet cable networks owned by the broadcasters or something like that.

[Geronimo]

Since the terms of the settlement are withheld we won't really know. But if more folks get turned off that would be a clue. As for what DISH may or may not have agreed to do in "compensation" that is pretty much speculation. If they did admit fault maybe they agreed to stop doing it.

[Richard King]

Dish lost the case really, but probably agreed to non monetary settlement. THey probably agreed to carry pet cable networks owned by the broadcasters or something like that.As a talk show host that I used to listen to all the time in Minneapolis used to say: "Ah, we don't know that". Please point to a reliable source where you have seen ANY details as to the settlement that says that Dish lost and what the conditions of that loss are.

[Mike123abc]

Here is a link, but it is to the WSJ pay site

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_CO_20021120_005914-search,00.html?collection=autowire%2F30day&vql_string=echostar+nbc%3Cin%3E%28article%2Dbody%2 9

A one line quote from there:

In May, the Supreme Court left intact a lower court ruling that upheld provisions of the Satellite Home Viewer Act. EchoStar claimed the statute ran afoul of the First Amendment

Echostar clearly lost the ability to transmit out of market DMA stations into area SHVIA said they could not. NBC & others were suing for the "damages" caused by the continued transmission of the signals after the law took effect.

The terms of the settlement were not released. My part about the obscure cable channel carrying is just speculation. Networks seem to love to try to force other channels to be carried, hence my speculation.

[BrettR]

Originally posted by Mike123abc
NBC & others were suing for the "damages" caused by the continued transmission of the signals after the law took effect.


In Philly DMA, about 20% of the cable TV HH have access to another NBC than the local NBC 10 WCAU owned by NBC. This versus the .01% of TV HH within the market that were getting distants from satellite television.

In Lehigh, Northampton, and Mercer Counties
the cable subscribers have access to WNBC (NBC's flagship). And since NBC owns both, they could request the cable systems drop WNBC so viewers will only have access to WCAU within the Philly market.

In Cumberland, Cape May and Atlantic Counties,
the cable subscribers have access to WMGM(independently owned).

In Chester and Berks Counties,
the cable subscribers have access to WGAL(Hearst owned).

In Washington D.C., the cable system carries WBAL (Hearst owned) along with WRC(NBC owned).

In San Jose, the cable system carries the Salinas NBC (Hearst owned) along with KNTV 11 (NBC owned).

What damages is NBC seeking??

There are FAR more cable subscribers in the NBC O&O markets that have access to an out of market NBC affiliate, sometimes that are not even NBC owned.


Maybe the NBC Network should sue the FCC for the significantly viewed law that is causing their owned and operated stations to face significant erosion of viewership in their markets they claim.

Maybe NBC should seek damages against themselves for granting Atlantic City an NBC affiliate. :rolleyes:

I agree NBC might tie in a cable network to this agreement. Disney usually gets atleast 1 per agreement. Maybe CNBC World recently added to DirecTV ??